RAMA REDDY DHASHARATHA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

WP/2893/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01005494202619 June 2026Author: B M SHYAM PRASAD3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, accepted a memo filed by the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner's counsel stated that an appeal remedy under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is available for challenging the order of the Tribunal and sought liberty to file an Income Tax Appeal (ITA). The Court accepted the memo and disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy in law, subject to all just exceptions. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rama Reddy Dasharatha, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging a notice passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated December 27, 2019, and an order passed by the Income Tax Officer (Respondent No. 2) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The petitioner sought to quash and set aside this notice and order. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated December 27, 2019, and the consequent order passed by the Income Tax Officer for AY 2017-18 are legal and valid. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought to quash and set aside the impugned notice and order. The specific grounds for challenge were not detailed in the provided text, but the prayer indicates a challenge to their legality and validity. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents appeared before the court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2893 OF 2026 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

RAMA REDDY DHASHARATHA NO. 26, LAKSHMISAGARA, NERALUR POST, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 562107. AGEDABOUT 56 YEARS S/O RAMA REDDY

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. LIKITH PATEL M K.,ADVOCATE) AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 4(3)(1), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560095.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO - 4(3)(3),

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BMTC BUILDING, NEAR GAMES VILLAGE, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT UNDER ARTICLE

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONERS CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF BE PLEASED TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED NOTICE PASSED UNDER SEC 143(3) OF THE ACT DTD 27.12.2019 IN DIN AND ORDER NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019- 20/1023270470(1) ANNX-K PASSED BY THE R-2 FOR THE AY 2017-18.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo which reads as under. "The Advocate for the Petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the aforesaid Writ Petition, as the appeal remedy under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is available for challenging the Order of Tribunal. The Advocate for the Petitioner seeks liberty to file ITA (Income Tax Appeal) in the aforesaid case of the Petitioner."

Upon hearing Mr. E. I. Sanmathi, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents, the memo is accepted and the petition stands disposed of with liberty to avail remedy in law subject to all just exceptions.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →